My client's prior lawyer was suspended from practice. How can I compensate that suspended lawyer's office for the legal work it did before the suspension?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney represents a client in a legal matter who was previously represented by an attorney who has since been suspended from the practice of law. The inquiring attorney asked what methods may be employed to compensate the suspended attorney's office for the previous legal work performed on the client's behalf.

The panel advised that the fees should be divided according to quantum meruit, that is, the fair value of the services rendered before the former attorney's termination of the representation. To the extent the client does not have a separate agreement for compensating the suspended attorney for services performed prior to suspension, the inquiring attorney may pay a portion of the fee to the suspended attorney or the office, based on the reasonable value of the services the suspended attorney rendered prior to suspension. The panel cited its Opinions 91-71 and 92-3.

In practice

Under this opinion, a lawyer who takes over a matter from a predecessor who was later suspended may compensate the predecessor's office for the earlier work on a quantum meruit basis, keyed to the reasonable value of the pre-suspension services, where no separate compensation agreement governs. The opinion frames the payment as division according to the fair value of work already done, not a share of the ongoing representation.

Common questions

Q: How do I compensate a suspended predecessor attorney for prior work?

A: Per the opinion, on a quantum meruit basis, meaning the fair value of the services rendered before the former attorney's termination of the representation.

Q: What if there's no separate fee agreement with the suspended attorney?

A: Per the opinion, absent a separate agreement, the inquiring attorney may pay the suspended attorney or the office a portion of the fee based on the reasonable value of the pre-suspension services.

Background and rules framework

The panel resolved the inquiry on a quantum meruit basis without quoting a specific numbered Rule of Professional Conduct, treating the payment as the fair value of the suspended attorney's pre-suspension services and cross-referencing its Opinions 91-71 and 92-3, which address fee division with a lawyer suspended after the representation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• None cited.

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• R.I. Ethics Advisory Opinion 91-71: fee division with a lawyer suspended after the fee agreement ends at suspension.
• R.I. Ethics Advisory Opinion 92-3: a suspended lawyer's fee share set by quantum meruit for pre-suspension work.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 92-58: Paying a Suspended Attorney by Quantum Meruit Under 1.5(e)
• RI EAP Op. 92-54: A Suspended Attorney Paid Quantum Meruit for Pre-Suspension Work
• RI EAP Op. 92-03: A Suspended Lawyer's Fee Share Set by Quantum Meruit

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992 (Opinion 92-81, issued November 18, 1992), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which amended the fee rules (Rule 1.5, including fee division). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2092-81.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
Opinion 92-81, Request #309
Issued November 18, 1992

An attorney seeks Panel advice with regard to a division of fees with another law office. The inquiring attorney represents a client in a legal matter who was previously represented by an attorney who has been suspended from the practice of law. The inquiring attorney asks what methods may be employed in order to compensate the suspended attorney's office for the previous legal work performed on behalf of the client.

The Panel agrees that the fees should be divided according to quantum meruit; the fair value of services rendered before the former attorney's termination of the representation. To the extent that the client does not have a separate agreement for compensating the suspended attorney for his services performed prior to suspension, the inquiring attorney may pay a portion of the fee to the suspended attorney or his office, based upon the reasonable value of the services rendered by the suspended attorney prior to the suspension. See also Opinions #91-71 and #92-3.